I had something funny as shit to tell you, and the rest of the usuall suspects didn't need to hear it. I'll try to remember, but yeah, it'd be cool. Let me know when you're about to do it, becauseI'd want to take it right back down with as many nutbags only exist to stalk............(handshake)

The Montreal Canadiens open a four-game road trip knowing no team in their conference has more points than they do. The San Jose Sharks can't make the same claim, but they'll return from a lengthy trip feeling awfully good. San Jose looks to extend its season-high winning streak to six games Monday when it faces Montreal in its first home game since Feb. 14. The Sharks (36-21-8) dropped the first three contests of their eight-game trip, falling in succession to the New York Rangers, New York Islanders and New Jersey Devils.

Whilst I have no numbers to back any of my claims, I agree with you that if a road team had a huge lead before HT after a run made by the home team than the 2H play would be the home team because of the momentum they bring into the 2H + you have to factor the effect of the crowd as well. This is even more profitable from a betting standpoint if that road team happens to be the underdog as well.

However I disagree with your first point, that if a road team takes a big lead into HT you simply fade them. The reason they have the lead in the first place is invariably because of a lack of intensity from the home team and that intangible generally is something a team doesn't overturn during HT. I found it fairly profitable if anything to take the + in the 2H with the road team because of it and also you will find that the home team generally becomes the public play with Vegas trying to bait those who took the home team from the beginning of the game.

Flashback to last January and the Steelers were a banged up and weary squad coming into Denver to play a playoff game in which they ultimately lost. Now with the exception of Big Ben having a healthy left foot this time around let's look at the current state of the Steelers: Due to injuries and 2nd round pick/presumptive starting LT Mike Adams sucking ass the Steelers will enter this game with exactly 1 starter on the offensive line that was in that same position when they started training camp a few weeks ago. What was supposed to be a revamped offensive line perhaps finally fixing a longtime weakness the Steelers instead have more questions on this unit filled with retreads than they did at the end of last season. Starting at RB last January was Isaac Redman who will get the start again here but he's missed two full weeks of practice with a bad hip and now has an ankle injury on top of that. Mike Wallace actually played in that game in January but with an entire new offense to learn it will be a challenge considering he is just now reporting to camp. This offense suddenly doesn't look too great, especially with an offensive line held together by duct tape going up against a good pass rush. Defensively the Steelers also have problems. James Harrison may not even play in this game after preseason knee surgery. And Ryan Clark will most likely miss the game as well with a sickle-cell disease. That means Pittsburgh will start two new starters in the secondary. The Steelers walked into this stadium last January banged up and full of question marks and really not a hell of a lot has changed.

But this bet isn't so much about what Pittsburgh may or may not be able to field. This bet is about Peyton Manning. I'm not pretending to know how good Manning will be this season, whether he still has zip on the ball, or how long he will even last after a few games of taking hits. But I know this guy is one of the most competitive players to ever take the field. This is a guy for the most part that has never really faced many questions in his career. You knew you were getting 12 wins, a Top 3 MVP finish, 40+ TD'S and a division crown. Now suddenly people are wondering just what this guy has left. That seed of doubt has crept into everyone's minds. Not only that but he was outright cut by the team he helped put on the map. I believe we have all the ingredients necessary for a statement game. Everything is lining up perfectly for Manning (and the Broncos who so desperately wanted him) to come out in front of a jacked up crowd on a national TV showcase game and lay down a huge message to everyone who has doubted him over the last 18 months. Maybe Manning will suck this year who knows, but all great players have one last kick and I think Manning will give it everything he's got this year and no more so than right off the bat in Week 1.

I know the postseason is a "new" season and all situational spots are different but I'm just wondering what Vikings backers have to say about this:

If you throw out the garbage game at the end of the year where the Giants quit, did you know Minnesota only played 6 games all season against offenses ranked in the Top 20? That's right, they played 10 of 16 games this year against offenses in the bottom 12 of the league (counted the Giants here because they quit).

Look what their defense did (or didn't do) against those 6 offenses in the Top 20:

Points allowed: 23, 31, 27, 26, 30, and 26 for an average of 27.1 per game.

Yards allowed: 424, 448, 259, 331, 398, and 397 for an average of 376 per game.

Opposing QB completion %: 70, 65, 54, 63, 69, and 64 for a total of 137 passes complete out of 212 or 65%.

Opposing QB Yards Per Attempt: 10.4, 9.0, 6.7, 7.0, 8.9, and 9.1

Opposing Yards Per Carry allowed: 4.8, 4.5, 5.6, 4.7, 4.5 and 3.1

Opposing QB Ratings: 110.6, 109.2, 87.8, 108.5, 127.7, and 123.2

Opposing QB TD/INT Ratio: 14-1

The Vikings went 3-3 SU and 2-4 ATS in those games with 2 wins coming over Green Bay and the other on a last second missed FG by Baltimore.

We've all heard or know how big
momentum is in the game of football and how tough it is to get it
back after it is lost whether that be through a loss or a break in
action (bye). But check this out:

Since the NFL playoffs expanded to 12
teams in 1990 with the #1 and #2 seeds in each conference owning a
first round bye there have been 23 times where a #1 or #2 seed has
LOST their final regular season game (more often than not resting
starters and tanking) and then had their bye. But unbelievably only 3
of those 23 #1 or #2 seeds that lost their final regular season game
went on to win the Super Bowl!!!! 3 out of 23 in 19 years! I think
that speaks volumes as to how big of a factor momentum is in this
game and just how utterly STUPID it is to rest starters and tank your
final regular season game if you have a bye after that, effectively
killing any momentum.

The 3 winners?

1999 Rams

1994 49ers

1991 Redskins

It's interesting to note that it has
not happened in 10 years and two of the wins came back in an age
where power teams ruled and a wild card or lower seed making noise
was almost an afterthought.

Look what has happened just since 2002
(when the NFL expanded to 8 division winners and only 4 wild cards
got in):

Since 2002 there have been 12 #1 or #2
seeds that have lost their final regular season game. They are 0 for
12 in Super Bowl wins. Half of them (6) have gone down on their home
field in their first game. 3 more have gone down on their home field
in the conference finals, and of just the 3 teams to make it to the
Super Bowl all 3 have gone down in the big game. Those 12 teams
combined to go an ugly 7-14 ATS and suffered many SU losses as
favorites.

I guess the message is here if the
Colts, Chargers, Saints, or Vikings/Eagles (this year's potential #1
and #2 seeds) decide to tank Week 17 then it is just about the
equivalent to suicide as far as their Super Bowl hopes go. I'm not
saying they won't win the big game if they lose in Week 17 but holy
shit, history certainly says their chances are slim at best!

We've all heard or know how big
momentum is in the game of football and how tough it is to get it
back after it is lost whether that be through a loss or a break in
action (bye). But check this out:

Since the NFL playoffs expanded to 12
teams in 1990 with the #1 and #2 seeds in each conference owning a
first round bye there have been 23 times where a #1 or #2 seed has
LOST their final regular season game (more often than not resting
starters and tanking) and then had their bye. But unbelievably only 3
of those 23 #1 or #2 seeds that lost their final regular season game
went on to win the Super Bowl!!!! 3 out of 23 in 19 years! I think
that speaks volumes as to how big of a factor momentum is in this
game and just how utterly STUPID it is to rest starters and tank your
final regular season game if you have a bye after that, effectively
killing any momentum.

The 3 winners?

1999 Rams

1994 49ers

1991 Redskins

It's interesting to note that it has
not happened in 10 years and two of the wins came back in an age
where power teams ruled and a wild card or lower seed making noise
was almost an afterthought.

Look what has happened just since 2002
(when the NFL expanded to 8 division winners and only 4 wild cards
got in):

Since 2002 there have been 12 #1 or #2
seeds that have lost their final regular season game. They are 0 for
12 in Super Bowl wins. Half of them (6) have gone down on their home
field in their first game. 3 more have gone down on their home field
in the conference finals, and of just the 3 teams to make it to the
Super Bowl all 3 have gone down in the big game. Those 12 teams
combined to go an ugly 7-14 ATS and suffered many SU losses as
favorites.

I guess the message is here if the
Colts, Chargers, Saints, or Vikings/Eagles (this year's potential #1
and #2 seeds) decide to tank Week 17 then it is just about the
equivalent to suicide as far as their Super Bowl hopes go. I'm not
saying they won't win the big game if they lose in Week 17 but holy
shit, history certainly says their chances are slim at best!

Sitting here half drunk and decided to punch in some of the plays I was
looking at for Week 1 so I figured I might as well post them too. Plus,
I'm a degen and football is cool.

Dallas -3

Seattle -7

Arizona -6.5

Washington/NY Giants UNDER 39

Square looking plays for the most part early but that's why I'm on em early as I think these lines probably won't get any better for me and there's a good possibility they get worse. Other Week 1 plays I'll probably be on where I should get better or equal lines than what is currently available: Titans, Browns, Packers.

Football, I sport I can bet on and make money on and actually watch without wanting to shoot myself unlike, you know, baseball.

Activities offered by advertising links to other sites may be deemed an illegal activity in certain jurisdictions. Viewers are specifically warned that they should inquire into the legality of participating in any games and/or activities offered by such other sites. The owner of this website assumes no responsibility for the actions by and makes no representation or endorsement of any of these games and/or activities offered by the advertiser. As a condition of viewing this website viewers agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from the viewer’s participation in any of the games and/or activities offered by the advertiser.